Montaigne on Cicero: The Art of Sincere Writing

You have probably caught yourself doing it: drafting a message and choosing words designed to impress rather than to communicate. You reach for the elegant phrase when a simple one would do. Michel de Montaigne recognized exactly this trap when he reflected on the letters of Marcus Tullius Cicero — the celebrated Roman orator and statesman. In his thirty-ninth essay of the first book of the Essays, titled A Consideration upon Cicero, Montaigne examines what letters and writings reveal about the person behind them. The result is a remarkably honest meditation on vanity, authenticity, and the courage to show yourself as you truly are — themes that resonate deeply within the Masonic tradition of self-knowledge and moral integrity.

What Is This Essay Really About?

In A Consideration upon Cicero, Montaigne turns his attention to the personal correspondence of several towering figures from antiquity. At the center stand Cicero’s letters, but those of Pliny the Younger and Seneca also come under scrutiny. Montaigne uses these letters as a mirror: what do they tell us about the writer? Are they sincere, or were they composed with one eye on publication and posterity?

At first glance the essay appears to be a literary comparison, but it quickly reaches into deeper questions about honesty, self-knowledge, and the way we present ourselves to the world. Montaigne opens with a striking confession. He admits that, as a writer, he feels uncomfortable with the polished, rhetorical style that Cicero employs. Where Cicero filled his letters with elegant turns of phrase, political commentary, and at times undisguised self-praise, Montaigne pursues something different: a direct, personal tone that comes closer to the essence of the person. He admires Cicero as an orator and thinker, yet he is critical of the vanity that shines through the correspondence. That tension between admiration and critique forms the thread running through the entire essay.

Cicero, Pliny, and Seneca: Three Styles Compared

A significant portion of the essay is devoted to comparing the letter-writing styles of three Roman authors. Cicero, Montaigne argues, writes letters that frequently serve to document his own achievements. His correspondence with Atticus and other contemporaries contains valuable historical insight, yet it also betrays a longing for recognition and immortality. Pliny the Younger, who likewise left behind an extensive body of letters, displays similar tendencies according to Montaigne: his letters are carefully composed, as though they were intended for a wider audience from the very start.

Seneca, by contrast, receives a gentler assessment. Although Seneca’s letters to Lucilius clearly served a philosophical purpose, Montaigne appreciates their depth of content and the fact that Seneca is less preoccupied with his own reputation. Seneca’s letters are vehicles for ideas rather than a showcase for the writer himself. For Montaigne, this distinction is essential: the difference between writing to be seen and writing to convey something of genuine substance.

The Heart of the Matter: Sincerity Over Display

The central theme of A Consideration upon Cicero is the question of authenticity in the written word. Montaigne argues that the value of a text does not reside in the beauty of its sentences or the eloquence of its author, but in the sincerity with which it is written. He sees a real danger in the kind of writing that is primarily designed to impress the reader. A letter or essay that presents the writer as more accomplished than he truly is loses, in Montaigne’s view, its very reason for existing.

The worth of a piece of writing lies not in fine words, but in the honesty with which the writer dares to reveal himself.

Montaigne turns this insight on himself as well. He describes his own writing practice as an attempt to speak without a mask. His Essays, he repeatedly emphasizes, are not exercises in rhetoric but efforts at self-examination. By using Cicero as a contrast, he makes clear what he himself aspires to: a style of writing that does not seek to persuade but to reveal. For Freemasons, who are called upon to work upon the rough ashlar of their own character, this distinction carries particular weight. The ritual and symbolism of the Craft continually remind us that outward appearances mean little if the inner work has not been done.

What This Essay Teaches Us About Self-Knowledge

Behind the literary comparison lies a deeper philosophical lesson. Montaigne suggests that the way a person writes reveals how that person relates to himself. Those who are constantly preoccupied with the impression they make miss the opportunity to arrive at genuine self-knowledge. Cicero’s letters serve, in this sense, as a warning: for all their eloquence, the person behind the words sometimes remains hidden — precisely because he tries so hard to be visible.

Montaigne invites the reader to put the same question to himself. Not only in writing, but in every conversation, every encounter: am I being sincere, or am I playing a role? It is a question that deserves a central place in everyday ethics. Montaigne makes clear that honesty is a continuous practice, never something to be taken for granted. This call to perpetual self-examination echoes the Masonic charge to engage in nightly reflection — to review one’s actions and intentions with an unflinching eye.

Key Insights at a Glance

Cicero’s letters, according to Montaigne, betray a desire for fame that ultimately undermines sincerity. Pliny the Younger shares this inclination toward self-presentation in his correspondence. Seneca receives a more favorable judgment for the depth of his content and his relative lack of self-glorification. Montaigne advocates a style of writing that reveals rather than impresses. Ultimately, the essay is a plea for self-knowledge as the prerequisite for sincere communication — a principle that stands at the very foundation of Masonic philosophy.

Why This Essay Still Matters Today

In an age of personal branding, social media, and carefully curated online profiles, Montaigne’s critique of Cicero feels more relevant than ever. The temptation to present oneself as more attractive, more intelligent, or more successful has not disappeared since the sixteenth century — it has intensified. Montaigne reminds us that genuine connection only becomes possible when we dare to set aside the mask. It is not the perfect sentence that makes a text valuable, but the willingness of the writer to be vulnerable and truthful.

For those who walk the Masonic path, this message resonates on multiple levels. The Lodge is meant to be a space where Brothers meet on the Level — without pretense, without the social masks worn in the outside world. Montaigne’s essay, written centuries before modern Freemasonry took its organized form, articulates a principle that the Craft holds sacred: that the pursuit of self-knowledge, practiced with humility and sincerity, is the highest form of wisdom. Whether we are composing a letter, delivering a speech in Lodge, or simply reflecting in silence, the question remains the same — are we revealing truth, or merely performing eloquence?

Montaigne’s reflection on Cicero is far more than an exercise in literary criticism. It is an invitation — one that speaks directly to anyone committed to honest self-examination. In a world that rewards polished surfaces, choosing sincerity over spectacle requires real courage. The value of our words, whether written or spoken, ultimately depends not on how skillfully they are crafted, but on how truthfully they reflect who we are. For Freemasons and seekers alike, this remains one of the most important lessons the rough ashlar has to teach.

Copyright text & image: devrijmetselaar.nl
Texts are based on the ideas and content of the author of devrijmetselaar.nl, reviewed, corrected, and supplemented with the assistance of OpenAI. Images are created based on the ideas of the author of devrijmetselaar.nl using OpenAI/DALL-E.

Frequently Asked Questions